How an obstruction of justice case may be shaping up against Trump

A pretty comprehensif update from last weekend
re : Trump in trouble
The unraveling of a Presidency ?

Two of the most intriguing questions in US national political discourse – what does the special counsel Robert Mueller have on Donald Trump,
and what more is he looking for? – were filled in at a remarkable pace this week, as details of highly sensitive documents and internal Trump
Organization emails became public for the first time.

Taken together, the documents could indicate that the special counsel is looking seriously at whether Trump committed an obstruction of justice on
potentially various fronts, legal experts say.

... snip ...

Obstruction ?

In any obstruction of justice case against Trump, Mueller might also review reports from this week that Trump had directly contacted the chairman of
the Senate judiciary committee after it was announced that Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, was scheduled to speak with the committee, said
Mariotti.

Mueller might additionally review this week’s report that before pardoning the Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, Trump asked the US attorney general, Jeff
Sessions, whether it would be possible to drop federal criminal charges against Arpaio.

“I think that all goes into the same bucket of things that could be used by Mueller if he’s looking at obstruction of justice,” said Mariotti

... Snip....

Draft letter

The documents were still flowing on Friday afternoon, with a New York Times report that Mueller was in possession of a draft letter explaining
Trump’s rationale for firing Comey. The draft was reportedly written by Trump and an aide, Stephen Miller, but rejected by the White House counsel,
on unknown grounds.

Trump has said he fired Comey while experiencing frustration at the FBI investigation of his campaign’s alleged Russia ties and at Comey’s refusal
to publicly exculpate Trump. The firing ironically hastened the appointment of a special counsel, under whom the investigation has expanded.

Former US attorneys judged the draft letter and its possession by Mueller as significant. “Logical assumption: If WH Counsel wouldn’t let him send
it, [Trump] had improper if not illegal motives for firing FBI Director Comey,” wrote Joyce Vance, a former federal prosecutor in Birmingham,
Alabama, and now a University of Alabama law professor.e draft letter’s existence was that Miller, the aide who helped Trump draft the letter, is
“perhaps implicated in conspiracy to obstruct justice”.

“I think he got everybody’s tax returns,” said Mariotti, now a defense attorney at Thompson Coburn in Chicago. “I have no professional,
personal knowledge of it, but when you’re looking at someone for something unrelated to taxes, still to get tax return information is very valuable
information that tells you a lot of valuable things: who owes them money, who they owe money to, and where they keep their money.”

In the end, any President can fire the FBI Director for any reason or no reason at all and it's legal to do so.

IMO opinion its a sensationalized story in hopes it will leak through important news and just more partisan crap. The next election campaign started
the moment Trump won. Both sides are acting very badly and the media is just in it for top billing and $'s. These things are fundraising tools and to
get the base fired up and in full on hate mode.

They will be talking about this three years from now, without ever having presented any real evidence to the public. It's just a game. A very bad for
the US game at that.

If that were true, it would have been leaked by now and I don't mean the vomit coming from so called anonymous insiders every few days to tie up the
headlines with partisan crap.

Nothing will ever come of this just like nothing ever comes from these witch hunts by both sides. It's just a campaigning tactic IMO. Both sides do it
and both sides are out of control IMO.

Then you pick Comey's bestest buddy as a special prosecutor

It's a dog and pony show. A never ending dog and pony show and the crowd is growing
tired of dogs jumping over ponies and they are leaving the venue.

Shove top secret documents down a pant leg and you get probation and a fine small in comparison to your net worth. Meaningless.

Have sex with an emotionally immature intern in the Oval Office, you have taken advantage of as President, commit perjury and you become a national
star and the darling of a political party and get millions in speaking fee's.

Set up a server at home to hide government correspondence and destroy thousands of them knowing full well it's illegal and nothing happens.

If that were true, it would have been leaked by now and I don't mean the vomit coming from so called anonymous insiders every few days to tie up the
headlines with partisan crap.

If what were leaked? That they have proof of his intent in firing Comey?

Not having a leak is not proof of anything whatsoever.

Nothing will ever come of this just like nothing ever comes from these witch hunts by both sides. It's just a campaigning tactic IMO. Both sides do it
and both sides are out of control IMO.

That may be true, but I think it's most logical to wait and see what comes from the investigation. It appears you are putting the cart before the
horse here without having all of the info to inform your decision.

Then you pick Comey's bestest buddy as a special prosecutor It's a dog and pony show. A never ending dog and pony show and the crowd is growing tired
of dogs jumping over ponies and they are leaving the venue.

They worked together in a professional capacity, from what I understand. They are not best buddies. That seems to have been a gross misrepresentation
of their relationship.

Also, you can be assured that their alleged relationship would have nothing to do with the veracity of the evidence Mueller would need to go after
Trump.

So your assertion is quite irrelevant to this process.

Shove top secret documents down a pant leg and you get probation and a fine small in comparison to your net worth. Meaningless. Have sex with an
emotionally immature intern in the Oval Office, you have taken advantage of as President, commit perjury and you become a national star and the
darling of a political party and get millions in speaking fee's.

I'm not sure how any of that applies to the current situation. Trump is not accused of doing any of that.

Set up a server at home to hide government correspondence and destroy thousands of them knowing full well it's illegal and nothing happens.

That intent was never proven. Intent is key, even in Trump's case.

This will be the same.

That may be true, but this is hardly comparable to any of the examples you listed. This is much different.

I think we have a problem in that I'm disgusted with both sides. I'm not defending either, just pointing out what is true historically.

As to proof, I mean someone coming forward, documents in had, giving their full names and not hiding behind a reporter who may or may not be lying or
have partisan motivations.

Intent? Since the President can fire the FBI Director for any reason at all without doing wrong? You don't think this smells of partisan propaganda?
This card is played all the time by both sides. Remember the hub bub over Bush firing and replacing people from Justice and getting the treatment,
while Obama did the same and got little push back, but he did get pushback and just like now, it was propaganda since all Presidents have that power
legally.

The idea that any President does not have the right to put in place people that are supporting of their administration is absurd to be honest. It's
very telling the media never seems to point that out unless it's directed at a person they support. Boths side are two faced.

There are more than just two sides. The side we should stand on is the truth.

I'm not defending either, just pointing out what is true historically.

Historically, we have but only one example that is reasonably comparable. In that case, the president resigned.

As to proof, I mean someone coming forward, documents in had, giving their full names and not hiding behind a reporter who may or may not be lying or
have partisan motivations.

Without that sort of proof, all we can do is sit back and wait to see what happens.

Intent? Since the President can fire the FBI Director for any reason at all without doing wrong?

Yes, he has that right, but that does not mean he is immune from potential consequences when his intent can be proven and that intent is a violation
of the law.

You don't think this smells of partisan propaganda?

No. I think there were many logical reasons to investigate what has happened over the course of the last election and Trump's actions while
president.

The propaganda is in the stories and coverage surrounding it.

This card is played all the time by both sides. Remember the hub bub over Bush firing and replacing people from Justice and getting the treatment,
while Obama did the same and got little push back, but he did get pushback and just like now, it was propaganda since all Presidents have that power
legally.

I think this is different. This directly involves the president and people around him.

The idea that any President does not have the right to put in place people that are supporting of their administration is absurd to be honest. It's
very telling the media never seems to point that out unless it's directed at a person they support. Boths side are two faced.

A president does not have the right to use his office to directly influence official investigations and we should never support any president,
regardless of party, if their actions indicate they intend/intended to do so.

Firing someone because they do not support and administration's goals is not the same as firing someone because they refuse to stop an investigation
that is tied to the president. That is corrupt leadership.

The letter had been drawn up by Miller, acting as a stenographer to capture Trump’s thoughts, according to several people with knowledge of the
process. While it did not dwell on Russia, the draft included language similar to what was included in the final version ultimately sent by Trump:
“While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the
judgment of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the Bureau.”

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.